CE vs SE Head-to-Head Experiment!

[VoiceOfUnreason]

We pause for a brief message from our sponsors

Advocacy belongs in the other !@#$#$%#$ thread!

Thank you.

 

[Mr. Civtastic]

Disclaimer: Im in no means a SE expert.

I think caste system can be very helpful in the SE. If we're using SE just for gs, Caste system overcomes the limits that your cities will have on how many great scientists you can run, which is often 2 until Observatories. Caste system is also very solid for farming out that gs, gm, or ga depending on the situation. And if you have on city as a gp farm, caste system will crank out gp left and right, especially if you're philo and have parthenon. And Ive read an article in the strategy section that states that a center gp farm gets around 30% more gp then spreading it out over several cities.

I wouldnt run it the entire game, though...whipping is the other strong point of all those farms, and youll need time to get that pop back, which is where caste system isnt helpful. But are you whipping ALL the time? I find myself whipping less then I used to. Of course, if you're Gandhi you have it made...switch to slavery when you need to whip, otherwise, stick in caste system.

One somewhat recent game I tried running a variation of the SE where I had as many gm as possible, with pyramids to fill in the beaker gap. I was able to run my research at 100% while benefitting from representation. This wouldnt have been possible without caste system.

 

[Wodan]

No.

No as in you don't agree? That is, you're saying the stated evidence leads to the conclusion?

What I was saying is that a philosophical leader will receive more GP which they can use as lightbulbs giving a LOT of beakers, which you have to take into consideration in terms of who's accumulating more beakers over time(i.e., you can't just compare commerce output in CE vs. specialist output with SE)

Agreed.

Yes, philosophical is better than other traits, such as industrious. Ask most high-level players on these forums.

Whew.

What civic are you going to run early in the game that is better than representation? HR? I'd rather have representation, thanks.

In most cases, so would I. However, there are cases where other government civics would provide a more desired benefit. In addition, the Pyramids isn't exactly free. Those hammers mean that's a city not making units, Forge, granary, settlers, etc. and also not running any scientists (because you need to work mines/quarries). How many beakers does that cost you?

All I'm saying is the math isn't a slam dunk like you're saying.

Here, you are just wrong. We proved this awhile back. A SE will also have a GP farm, but also specialists in parallel.

Point me to the thread, please, which says that after the GP farm is up and running, the SE can still produce GP in parallel.

Fair enough, I'm just assuming that the test of neutral leaders will end up with the CE being superior based on extensive testing I did awhile back.

With recent changes in the game (Pyramids costing more, etc) I think it's fair to say that any testing done previously isn't necessarily still valid.

Again, you are wrong here. They go hand in hand. Both require a heavy-food economy to work most successfully.

Exactly. You can extensively whip, or you can run specialists. You can't do both in the same city at the same time.

A CE is too low-food to grow back quickly after whipping, especially when you are whipping A LOT.

Agreed. I said this myself.

^^^not to mention that with all the surplus food you can also work a lot more +++hammers tiles meaning more production = faster, larger army = more synergy with militaristic victories.

So? Again, you aren't running specialists.

You're listing all the great things you can do if you make farms instead of cottages on your grasslands. I agree with all of them. You can extensively whip, you can work lots of hammer tiles, you can run specialists.

One somewhat recent game I tried running a variation of the SE where I had as many gm as possible, with pyramids to fill in the beaker gap. I was able to run my research at 100% while benefitting from representation. This wouldnt have been possible without caste system.

I really love the flexibility and creativity possible in Civ. To me, it isn't about "X is the best strategy", it's about all the possibilities and different ways to play.

Wodan

 

[Wodan]

We pause for a brief message from our sponsors

Originally Posted by Our Sponsors
Advocacy belongs in the other !@#$#$%#$ thread!

Thank you.

Agreed. This is all OT. Thanks for the reminder.

Here's the other thread so those so inclined can move over there. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=185639

Wodan

 

[futurehermit]

^^^you're saying you can't run specialists or whip at the same time. that's true also for the CE: you can't work cottages and whip at the same time. what i am saying is that with the high food economy of the SE, you can grow back to working your specialists faster than a CE can grow back to work the cottages. THAT is why i'm saying that whipping is better for the SE and goes hand in hand with it. (same with working hammers' tiles. there is a maximum amount of specialists you can work at different points in the game--like i said don't adopt caste system--and thus you can work more hammers squares with the high food output than you could with the low food output CE)

i don't care enough about this issue anymore to dig up all the old threads and prove all of my points. i've seen my arguments play out in many games i've played, as well as in other high-level games played by people like acidsatyr. if you read around the forums, for example, you'll find repeated arguments that philosophical is one of, if not THE, best trait at higher levels whereas industrious loses its value in the higher levels. i just wanted to add my 2 cents to this thread based on all of the testing i did previously. true, in warlords, things are different. however, i don't see things being radically different. true, pyramids are more expensive, but they were always expensive and therefore if you don't have stone, you don't build them. now, if you do have stone, you still build them. representation is by far the best civic prior to democracy so the fact that you would try and argue that point makes me really wonder about your position on things. hr is nice--if you don't get the pyramids--but representation >>> hr. i've lost track of the times i've been first to liberalism as a result of running representation + SE.

 

[Wodan]

Whipping merely hits the "reset" button, forcing the city back into an earlier state.

Assuming the workers have done their job, then:
-- A SE city will regrow at the same speed it grew in the first place
-- A CE city will regrow at the same speed it grew in the first place

So, all we're really comparing is a CE city which is working a cottage or two to a SE city which is working farms. After reaching some threshold, the SE city halts growth and works some farms and has a couple of specialists. Meanwhile, the CE city continues to grow and at some point halts growth and is working all cottages.

Note that while growing, the SE city has absolutely no commerce coming in.

The assertion here is that repeated whipping, which forces the SE city back into the "growing" status, somehow is "better" than for a CE.

However, it is plain that the CE will continue to have commerce coming in, despite being in a continual status of "regrowth". Meanwhile, the repeated whipping forces the SE to continually have zero commerce.

The only thing that repeated whipping does for a SE is result in more hammers. From a commerce and research standpoint, it clearly is better to use slavery with a CE.

Wodan

 

[futurehermit]

Assuming the workers have done their job, then:
-- A SE city will regrow at the same speed it grew in the first place
-- A CE city will regrow at the same speed it grew in the first place

But the SE's rate of growth is faster, meaning it will return to working specialists faster than the CE will return to working cottages.

THAT is why I'm saying whipping is more synergistic with the SE.

You admit yourself that the CE will continue to grow while the SE is returning to the whip Yes, the CE will have greater commerce, but the SE doesn't care about commerce, it cares about beakers from specialists and lightbulbed GP...not to mention all of the extra units and resulting conquered territory as a result of the increased hammers from whipping...

 

[acidsatyr]

The only thing that repeated whipping does for a SE is result in more hammers. From a commerce and research standpoint, it clearly is better to use slavery with a CE.

Wodan

The thing is, SE doesn't care for commerce output or slider. SE city cares to grow its population back in shortest amount of time possible, so it can hire specialist that bring beakers in. The regrowth speed of SE city is almost always higher than 50 % compared to CE and over 100% more so after biology. The fact that CE works cottages while growing back doesn’t mean alot since only a fraction of those cottages will give beakers, not to mention that once CE city reaches certain size, it cannot be whipped since it will take forever to grow back to its size. Once whipped CE city concentrating on research can’t really do much about shields anymore. The ability of every citie in farm economy to adapt to every given situation, be it shield or research wise, without disturbing the expansion of your empire , is what makes it so attractive and flexible.

 

[futurehermit]

^^ ^ ***exactly*** well said.

 

[Wodan]

You admit yourself that the CE will continue to grow while the SE is returning to the whip Yes, the CE will have greater commerce, but the SE doesn't care about commerce, it cares about beakers from specialists and lightbulbed GP...not to mention all of the extra units and resulting conquered territory as a result of the increased hammers from whipping...

First off, it should have been clear I was talking about commerce as well as whatever you do with it, as compared to whatever benefit the specialists provide. If not, I apologize for lack of precision. Now that I've clarified, however, let's not waste any more time on it.

But the SE's rate of growth is faster, meaning it will return to working specialists faster than the CE will return to working cottages.

So? The player merely whips again. That's the basis for this whole discussion. "Extensive whipping" I think were the exact words that were used.

Wodan

 

[futurehermit]

But you still only whip every 10 turns or so (to avoid excessive unhappiness) meaning that you are working specialists in the meantime. I believe Acidsatyr said it best...

 

[Wodan]

The thing is, SE doesn't care for commerce output or slider. SE city cares to grow its population back in shortest amount of time possible, so it can hire specialist that bring beakers in. The regrowth speed of SE city is almost always higher than 50 % compared to CE and over 100% more so after biology.

Ignoring (see previous email please).

The fact that CE works cottages while growing back doesn’t mean alot since only a fraction of those cottages will give beakers

Every cottage worked is one more than the SE city is working.

not to mention that once CE city reaches certain size, it cannot be whipped since it will take forever to grow back to its size.

That's a circular argument.

The ability of every citie in farm economy to adapt to every given situation, be it shield or research wise, without disturbing the expansion of your empire , is what makes it so attractive and flexible.

I agree, but that has nothing to do with slavery. You're talking about the benefit of specialists. It's not like Slavery gives you that flexibility (except perhaps that you get to choose whether you whip a market or a barracks).

Wodan

 

[Wodan]

But you still only whip every 10 turns or so (to avoid excessive unhappiness) meaning that you are working specialists in the meantime. I believe Acidsatyr said it best...

Now that is a better argument, or approaching one.

Let's look at it, however. First off, can the city regrow faster than 10 turns? Or does the unhappiness wear off in just enough time to whip again?

Second, what kind of happiness benefits are there otherwise? Often there's charismatic, plantations, etc, plus many buildings that are typical whip bait give happiness, such as forge, theatre, market.

Third, assuming we've got this far, here is where you have a better argument, I think. We would be saying that however fast the city regrows (X), subtracted from the unhappiness cycle time (Y), equals that many turns of specialists. Compare the benefit there (in beakers, coins, GPP) to the commerce equaled by the CE running the whole time and fluctuating between # of cottages worked.

It seems to me that Y - X is going to be only a couple of turns, if not zero. So I find it hard to believe that it would be more than the constant income from the CE.

Wodan

 

[Ralgar]

I just read this and two other threads about the SE vs CE thematic... uff. These are lenghty discussions!

But if i understand the last few pages here right, the Head-to-Head Experiment has shown, that a Cottage Economy is overall better and with less micromanagement coupled? Another easy solution to this issue would be, to fight it out in a multiplayer game.

 

[acidsatyr]

Wodan, a circular argument is one where one case X has base in another case Y, and case Y has grounds in case X.
What I tried to said was that, once a city heavily sounded with cottages reaches a certain size, it is extremely inefficient to whip it (even once, let alone several times in a row), because it will take forever to grow back to its previous size, as we all know this from our games. That is not the case with city with farms; provided happiness, it can be whipped multiple times to the ground basically, and can grow back in a MUCH shorter amount of time which is the point I’m trying to make here.
I’m positive that buffer time where city works only farms to grow back to its desirable position where it assigns maximum number of specialist is better than slow grow time of city which works one cottage at the time. In the worst case, I can assign specialists as it grows back. You can experiment on your own and see that this is correct.

 

[Wodan]

First off, my apologies in advance. I'm in a sarky mood. Read on at your own risk. And, with that warning in mind, please don't take offense.

Wodan, a circular argument is one where one case X has base in another case Y, and case Y has grounds in case X.

My apologies. I believe this is more properly "Affirming the Consequent". It's hard to tell, because a double negative was used.
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#consequent

Or, perhaps, this is "Excluded Middle".
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#middle

In any event, the point is that just because a CE city takes longer to regrow, does not mean that it can't be whipped. Of course it can be whipped.

And regardless, it doesn't take "forever" to regrow ; it takes a finite time, quite a bit less than forever, actually.

Besides, who cares if the CE city is at size 5 (instead of size 6) for 15 turns longer than the SE city? What matters is the bottom line benefits compared between the two. Even at size 5, the CE city is working 5 cottages/hamlets/villages/towns. That is nothing to shake a stick at, which is exactly what you guys seem to be doing. Right?

What I tried to said was that, once a city heavily sounded with cottages reaches a certain size, it is extremely inefficient to whip it (even once, let alone several times in a row), because it will take forever to grow back to its previous size, as we all know this from our games.

There's that word forever again.

Also, "Appeal to Widespread Belief":
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#bandwagon

That is not the case with city with farms; provided happiness, it can be whipped multiple times to the ground basically, and can grow back in a MUCH shorter amount of time which is the point I’m trying to make here.

Congrats!! You have successfully converted food into hammers.

However, this says nothing for the amount of commerce/research/etc produced by that city. In fact, your commerce/research/etc is zero, nil, nada, goose egg, zilch.

I’m positive that buffer time where city works only farms to grow back to its desirable position where it assigns maximum number of specialist is better than slow grow time of city which works one cottage at the time.

Evidence, please? May I beg an anecdote, perhaps?

And, where do you get only "one cottage"? The city has to be working at least 2, because a whip of 1 for a size 1 city is prohibited (that would be zero and would disband the city). The city, whether CE or SE, has to be at least double the number of whipped citizens. Thus, if we're whipping 2, then it has to be size 4, whipping 3 has to be size 6.

In the worst case, I can assign specialists as it grows back.

That defeats your own argument in speed of regrowth.

If you assign a specialist per 2 farms, this effectively makes the SE regrow exactly identical to the CE (pre-Biology). This makes slavery pretty much the same for to the CE and SE case.

You can experiment on your own and see that this is correct.

Why? My assertion was that you can "extensively whip" or you can do CE or SE. If you whip, you are retarding your CE or SE strategy. That is self-evident.

Somebody, not sure if it was futurehermit or you acidsatyr, said that slavery is somehow magically better for a SE, that it takes "forever" for a CE to regrow, and that somehow the constant influx of commerce from the regrowing CE city is worse than the ups-and-downs of the SE specialist use. The burden of proof would seem to be on you, not me.
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#burden

Wodan

 

[futurehermit]

Now you're just being silly imo...

 

[acidsatyr]

I jumped into this discussion to acknowledge the fact that cities who run farms as opposed to cottages will grow back much faster. This is rather obvious and I don’t know why are we even discussing this.
Whoever made the claim that slavery is better with SE rather than CE was somewhat correct. Without going philosophically into this discussion and beating around the bush which I don’t have intentions to do, it is rather obvious that cities who are running farms will be affected by whipping differently than cities running something else. There is no denying the fact that SE will use slavery in larger quantities than cottage based economy. OR – it’s use will be less detrimental to its economy. Substantially larger amount of infrastructure is build with slavery in SE. I think THAT was the agenda behind that claim. If something else was implied by this id like to know what.

In any event, the point is that just because a CE city takes longer to regrow, does not mean that it can't be whipped. Of course it can be whipped.

Of course it can be whipped, nobody is denying that.

And regardless, it doesn't take "forever" to regrow ; it takes a finite time, quite a bit less than forever, actually.

But of course it doesn’t take forever. It takes "forever".

Besides, who cares if the CE city is at size 5 (instead of size 6) for 15 turns longer than the SE city? What matters is the bottom line benefits compared between the two. Even at size 5, the CE city is working 5 cottages/hamlets/villages/towns. That is nothing to shake a stick at, which is exactly what you guys seem to be doing. Right?

No. At least not me. Again, the point I'm trying to make is very simple. City working at size 5 out of max 6 is not a great difference. City who has been whipped down to size 5 out of 15, surrounded with cottages, however, is a big problem in my book. And we are not just talking about research here. Major part of SE is that it is shield wise rich economy.

Congrats!! You have successfully converted food into hammers.

However, this says nothing for the amount of commerce/research/etc produced by that city. In fact, your commerce/research/etc is zero, nil, nada, goose egg, zilch.

Missing the point ..

And, where do you get only "one cottage"?

I meant one extra cottage is worked with every extra size...
dont go into math here

That defeats your own argument in speed of regrowth.

It doesn’t really. All Im saying is in the worst case you can assign scientists as you grow. He consumes two food like cottage, given you have 4-food-farm to support him.. Just suggesting the possibilities..

Why? My assertion was that you can "extensively whip" or you can do CE or SE. If you whip, you are retarding your CE or SE strategy. That is self-evident.

Again, not correct.
Given the nature of SE and CE, slavery affects them very differently. Shield production is natural with slavery in SE, and very much less retarding for economy research wise. This is self evident.

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#burden

No need o bombard me with links to logical argument definitions, I passed the logic class easily.

 

[futurehermit]

No need o bombard me with links to logical argument definitions, I passed the logic class easily.

:ROFL:

I was thinking of mentioning I got an A+ in my undergraduate logic class, but I thought "am I really bothering going into this on an internet forum?" lol

 

[Wodan]

Whoever made the claim that slavery is better with SE rather than CE was somewhat correct.
There is no denying the fact that SE will use slavery in larger quantities than cottage based economy.

Sure there is denying the "fact".

A SE can use slavery in larger quantities than a CE. That doesn't mean the SE would desire to do so, because the more it is used, the less time is spent running specialists.

The statement, I think, qualifies as a moot point.

OR – it’s use will be less detrimental to its economy.

Would you care to provide some evidence for this claim? See below please.

Substantially larger amount of infrastructure is build with slavery in SE.

This depends on the quantity of slavery use, which is not necessarily more (in fact, the SE player will desire to use slavery less, in order to utilize the specialists which are the fuel driving the economy).

A SE can take less time to build the same infrastructure.

Of course it can be whipped, nobody is denying that.

Major part of SE is that it is shield wise rich economy.

I think you're talking about SE running slavery, not all SEs. Right?

Missing the point...

Not at all. Extensive use of slavery severely retards (actually it all but prohibits) use of specialists in the city. Yes, you get to convert some food into hammers. That's the only real benefit.

Shield production is natural with slavery in SE, and very much less retarding for economy research wise. This is self evident.

How is it self evident? A CE can use slavery. A SE can use slavery.

The difference between the two, that we agree, is that a SE can use slavery more often. This results in more and more hammers. However, the SE has to pay a higher "cost" because it has to use specialists less and less the more often slavery is used.

Therefore, the only way to make any sort of conclusion that it is "much less retarding, research wise," is to compare the "costs" of using slavery in each case. That is an difficult proposition, as we all know. But, without a doubt, it is hardly self evident one way or the other, as was claimed.

No need o bombard me with links to logical argument definitions, I passed the logic class easily.

I was thinking of mentioning I got an A+ in my undergraduate logic class.

Congrats, both of you. So did I.

Wodan